Licensees face up to fall out of Crehan case

Up to 600 licensees are facing legal action from former pub company Inntrepreneur following the loss of the Bernie Crehan case yesterday.

Mr Crehan lost his landmark 13-year fight against the company yesterday after the House of Lords overturned a Court of Appeal ruling, which found Mr Crehan's beer-tie had been in breach of European competition law.

He had been awarded damages - expected to be in the region of £250,000 - but now after losing the case is left with nothing. The other 600 licensees were waiting for the Crehan verdict to take their cases forward.

Mr Crehan claimed the unfair terms of the beer-tie made it impossible for his two pubs to compete, leading to a collapse of the business and losses of £1.3m. The former licensee, who operated two pubs in Staines between 1991 to 1993, said the restrictive tie allowed the company to maximise rent while supplier Courage maximised its beer prices.

Rupert Croft, the lawyer from Maitland Walker who represented Mr Crehan, said he has been inundated with calls from scared licensees who owe the former pubco money after the failure of their businesses. He said: "Many owe money as their pubs were in difficulty and it was not enforceable while the case was ongoing.

"It seems to be the end of the road for Mr Crehan's brave fight against Inntrepreneur. It's of little comfort to him, but his case has undoubtedly improved the position of tied tenants across the country. Pubcos can see what risks they face if they don't treat their tenants properly and become embroiled in damaging litigation from tenants on the scale of Mr Crehan's test case."

Inntrepreneur is considering whether to pursue those 600 licensees. A spokesman said: "Inntrepreneur had always believed that the claims against the company were ill-founded and that the tie was not in breach of competition law. The company now hopes that all other claims against it can now be quickly resolved."

Mr Crehan and his wife Dolores are reported to be devastated after the ruling. He was unavailable for comment.